BY: W. Shadid, 2-4-2008

It has been repeatedly shown that the coverage of Western media of matters concerning Islam and Muslims is generalising, stigmatising and generally opportunistic. The recent report of the European Committee against Racism and Intolerance, published in Strasbourg on 12 February 2008, deals with the situation in the Netherlands. The Committee concludes that Islamic communities in the Netherlands are on large scale subjected to generalizations, and frequently connected to terrorism both by newspapers and radio and television. In addition, when reporting on Islam or Muslims, the media seldom apply self-regulation, the accepted code on appropriate media conduct. Islamophobic material is extensively available on Dutch internet sites.(p.28, 38).

Yesterday, the first of April 2008, I participated in a radio debate organized by the Dutch Islamic Broadcast on the representation of Islam in Dutch media. Other participants were: a member of the Dutch Press Agency, an editor of the daily newspaper ‘Trouw’, the deputy of the end editor of the Dutch TV News (NOS-Journaal) and the final editor of the News Actualities program NOVA.
As expected, the points of view of the participants were not altered. A while back, I had also debated on this topic with the final editors of the eight Dutch News Actualities programs of the public broadcasting Company. In that debate I have stressed and defended the results of scientific research which indicate the subjectivity of the Dutch Press as far as Islam and Muslims are concerned. The final editors of the aforementioned programs continued their denial and pointed out that their coverage of this topic as well as their administrative diversity policy are satisfactory.
In this column I want to shed some light on one specific point of the debate which I consider of importance. Research has pointed out that the media seldom invite experts of immigrant origin for an interview, and especially those of Muslim background. Moreover, when this is the case the interviews are centred exclusively on their culture or religion and not on general topics in national policy according to their specializations. The final editors of the Dutch TV News (NOS-Journaal) and of NOVA denied this conclusion and referred to their recent interviews with Tariq Ramadan, a well known Islam expert.
Closer analysis of the two interviews shows that although the objection of both final editors is actually correct, they have indeed interviewed Ramadan, however, the way in which they did and the content of the interviews confirm the expressed accusation. A thorough examination of both interviews justifies the conclusion that in both cases they did not come with a balanced thematic treatment of the news item.
The interview of NOVA with Ramadan on the 12th of February 2008 may even be taken as a clear example of media deception. The program starts with a small introduction concerning the conclusions of the aforementioned report of the European Committee against Racism and Intolerance which stated that racist violence and discrimination have increased, and especially against Moroccans and Turks who are regularly stigmatised.
In the introduction the impression is created that NOVA is going to discuss the findings of the European Committee with the Islam expert Tariq Ramadan. Because of the actuality and importance of the subject, a balanced discussion of the pros and cons of the findings mentioned above could have been expected. Unfortunately however, the findings of the European Committee where not in any way discussed in the interview.
Tariq Ramadan was introduced as an Islam philosopher who defends the idea that Muslims themselves should take initiative in order to realize their integration in their host countries. According to him, they should not wait, or pull out, but participate and should not be distracted, for example by the film of MP Geert Wilders.
However, the interview centred exclusively on Ramadan as a person and on the United States’ refusal to allow him entrance to the country. In addition, old pictures of his public lecture were frequently shown as well as recordings of interviews with some of his colleagues about his appointment as visiting professor at the Erasmus University of Rotterdam.
Also the NOS interview with Ramdan confirms the proposition that the Dutch media do not frequently interview experts from immigrant origin on their expertise as experts on a specific subject. This was equally the case in the interview with Ramadan on the film of Wilders. The questions remained superficial considering that they were asked to an expert on Islam and philosophy. He was therefore forced to answer the questions as a politician and as a Muslim leader who is appointed by the media in order to calm down Muslims in the country. Unfortunately, adequate questions in order to get a reaction on the accusations of Wilders at the address of Islam and Muslims were not asked. While the News Journal of the Dutch public broadcasting company had now in fact a golden chance to ask Ramadan, or an another expert, to comment on the events in the Wilders’ film or to give his opinion on the other tolerant, social, and peaceful side of Islam.
Both examples are unfortunately no exceptions for the media covering Islam issues. Radio and TV programmes and newspapers discuss regularly substantive and relevant Islam issues and interview only with native Dutch experts who on their turn confirm, and in some cases even enforce the existing and mainly negative image of the religion.
The tragedy is that the media are not prepared to observe their coverage of this subject critically and neither to take the scientific research findings on the matter seriously. All accusations about generalizing and stigmatising news headline are rhetorically formulated starting with “is it not true?” This was also typical for the reaction of the man on the street to the Wilder’s film. Journalists are well aware of the fact that only few persons of Muslim background are to be blamed for the presented events in the Wilders’ film and that it is therefore wrong to hold all Muslims responsible. The result of the debates remains as always a vicious circle stopping the dialogue and continuing generalization and stigmatisation.